Film and the Christian

Todd Kappelman

The Convergence of High and Low Culture

An examination of the history of our century will reveal the
importance of viewing and studying film for any individuals who
wish to understand themselves and their time and place. Film is
essential because the distinction so many make between so called
"high" and "low" culture has in fact disappeared (if it ever
existed in the first place).

Approximately one hundred years ago the dawn of electronic
technology, beginning with the invention of the radio, gave birth
to mass media and communications. The increase in leisure time and
wealth fostered the birth and development of an entertainment
industry. The decline in the quality of education and the explosion
in the popularity of television sealed the union between what was
traditionally considered "high" art and popular culture. Western
society is now defined more strictly by the image, the sound, and
the moving picture than by the written word, which defined previous
centuries. Seldom does anyone ask, "What have you read lately?" One
is much more likely to hear the question, "What have you seen
lately." We have become, for better or worse, a visually oriented
society. Because literature is no longer the dominant form of
expression, scriptwriters, directors, and actors do more to shape
the culture which we live in than do the giants of literature or
philosophy. We may be at the point in the development of Western
culture that the Great Books series needs to be supplemented by a
Great Films series.

The church as a body has a long standing and somewhat
understandable tradition of suspicion concerning narrative fiction,
the concepts of which apply here to our discussion of film. A brief
examination of positions held by some Christians from the past
regarding written fictional narratives may help us to understand
the concern some have with involvement in fictional narratives as
recorded on film.

Alcuin, an influential Christian leader of the ninth century
was extremely concerned about the worldliness he saw in the church.
One of the things that troubled him the most was the monks'
fondness for fictional literature and stories about heroes such as
Beowulf and Ingeld. Writing to Higbald, Alcuin said: "Let the words
of God be read aloud at the table in your refractory. The reader
should be heard there, not the flute player; the Fathers of the
Church, not the songs of the heathen. . . . What has Ingeld to do
with Christ?"(1)

Tertullian, the father of Latin theology, writing six
centuries earlier voiced a similar concern about Christians
involved in secular matters when he said: "What has Athens to do
with Jerusalem?"(2) Specifically, Tertullian believed that the
study of pagan philosophers was detrimental to the Christian faith
and should be avoided at all costs.

Paul, the apostle, writing to the Church at Corinth, said:
"What partnership does righteousness have with iniquity? Or what
fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with
Belial?"(3)

Conclusion: The objections raised against the arts, both past and
present, do have merit and should not be dismissed too quickly.
Christians have a right and a responsibility to make sure that
entertainment and art are not used in a manner that is damaging to
their spiritual welfare. It is often a difficult call. For example,
many Christians objected to the work of Federico Fellini and Ingmar
Bergman in the fifties and sixties, yet men such as Francis
Schaeffer thought that it was necessary to pay attention to what
these individuals were saying and why.

The Nature of Film and the Opportunity for Christians

Properly understood film is a narrative medium, a kind of "visual
book" with a beginning, middle, and ending that contains some
degree of resolution. All film is not created equal; some movies
are made with the express purpose of providing diversionary
entertainment, while others represent the sincere efforts of
artists to make works of art that reflect human emotions and call
people to a more reflective existence. This second category of film
should be considered an art form and is therefore worthy of the
same attention that any other art such as the ballet, sculpture, or
painting receives.

Art is the embodiment of man's response to reality and his attempt
to order his experience of that reality.(4) Man has always and will
continue to express his hope and excitement, as well as his fears
and reservations about life, death, and what it means to be human
through the arts. He will seek to express his world through all
available means, and presently that includes film. Schindler's
List, a recent film by Steven Spielberg, is an excellent example of
film's ability to express man's hopes and fears.

As a picture of reality, film is able to convey an enormous range
of human experiences and emotions. The people one encounters in
films are frequently like us whether they are Christian or not.
Often the people we see in the better films are struggling with
some of the most important questions in life. They are attempting
to find meaning in what often appears to be a meaningless universe.
These people are often a vehicle used by a director, producer, or
writer to prompt us to ask the larger questions of ourselves.

Film is not and should not be required to be "uplifting" or
"inspiring." Christians should remember that non-Christians also
have struggles and wrestle with the meaning of life and their place
and purpose in the universe. Christians and non-Christians will not
and should not be expected to come to the same conclusions to the
problems they face in the fictional universe of film. The

Scriptures indicate that Christians and non-Christians are
different, and this should be a point of celebration, not alarm,
for the Christian audience.

T. S. Eliot, speaking about literature, but with much that can be
applied to film, had this advice for the Christian:

Literary criticism should be completed from a definite
ethical and theological standpoint.... It is necessary for
Christian readers [and film goers by extension], to scrutinize
their reading, [again film by extension], especially of works of
imagination, with explicit ethical and theological standards.(5)

Therefore, Christians should take their world view with them when
they attend and comment on any film. They should be cautious about
pronouncing a film that does not conform with Christian beliefs or
their particular notion of orthodoxy as unfit for consumption or
undeserving of a right to exist as art.

Conclusion: The need for participation in film arises from not only
the diversity of material with which the medium deals, but also
from the plurality of possible interpretations concerning a given
film. Christians have an opportunity to influence their culture by
entering the arena of dialogue provided by film and contending for
their positions and voicing their objections with sophistication,
generosity, and a willingness to hear from those of opposing
beliefs.

Some Concerns about Christian Participation in Cinema(6)

Christians are often concerned about the content of certain films
and the appropriateness of viewing particular pieces. This is a
valid concern that should not be dismissed too quickly and
certainly deserves a response from those who do view objectionable
material. The two primary areas of concern leveled by the many
detractors of contemporary culture as it pertains to film are found
in the categories of gratuitous sex and violence. It is crucial
that Christians understand the exact nature of sex and violence,
gratuitous and otherwise, and how it may be employed in art. Taking
only violence as the representative issue of these two concerns, we
must ask ourselves what, if any, redeeming value does it have, and
can it be used and viewed under some circumstances?

We might turn to the use of gratuitous violence in literature in
order to better understand the role of violence in film. If the
former is understood and embraced (albeit with reservation), the
latter may also be understood and embraced (again with caution) as
a means of expression employed by a new image-driven culture.

The image of gratuitous violence in modernity has one of its first
and most important articulations in The Rime of the Ancient
Mariner, by Samuel Taylor Coleridge. Recall that in the poem
the sailor shoots an albatross for absolutely no reason and is
condemned by his fellow sailors, who believed the bird was a good
omen, to wear the dead body around his neck. The ship is ravaged by
plague, and only the cursed mariner survives. After many days of
soul searching on the ghost ship, the mariner pronounces a blessing
upon all of creation and atones for his wrongs. A sister ship saves
the man, and he begins to evangelistically tell his story to anyone
who will listen.

Every time this poem is read in a class or other group there is
invariably some person who is fixated on the act of violence and
emphasizes it to the point of losing the meaning of the entire
poem. The story is about a mariner who realizes the errors of his
ways, repents, and comes to a restored relationship with creation
and other men. For Coleridge, the act of violence thus becomes the
vehicle for the turning of the character's soul from an infernal
orientation to the paradisal. Other authors have used similar
methods. Dante, for example, repeats a similar pattern when he
explored the spiritual realms in his poetic chronicle The Divine
Comedy. First, he takes his readers through the harshness,
pain, and misery of the Inferno before moving into Purgatory and
finally into the bliss and joy of Paradise. Dostoyevsky composed
four novels that begin with the heinous crime of Raskolnikov and
develop to the salvation of the Karamazov brothers.

Conclusion: The writers mentioned here and many serious,
contemporary film makers often explore the darkness of the human
condition. They don't do it simply to posture or exploit, but to
see deeply and lay bare the problems and tensions. But, they also
do it to look for answers, even the light of salvation/Salvation.
The picture is not always pretty, and the very ugliness of the
scene is often necessary to accurately portray the degree of
depravity and the miracle of salvific turns in fiction. By virtue
of their full acquaintance with the dark side of the human
condition, when they propose solutions, these solutions appear to
be viable and realistic.

Biblical Examples of Gratuitous Violence

The prohibition against and objections to the use of violence in
film may be understood better through an examination of the use of
violence in the Bible.

One example found in Scriptures is in the thirteenth chapter of the
book of Isaiah. In verses fifteen and sixteen the prophet is
forecasting the particulars of the future Assyrian military
invasion and the conditions the people of Israel and the
surrounding countries will experience. He writes:

Whoever is captured will be thrust through; all who are
caught will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed to
pieces before their eyes; their houses will be looted and their
wives ravished (Isaiah 13:15-16).

The prophet is talking about the impaling of men by the conquering
armies, the willful smashing of infants upon the rocks, and the
raping of women. In an oral and textual based society, those who
heard the words of Isaiah would have been able to imagine the
horrors he described and would have made mental images of the
scenes.

In an image-driven society if this scene were to be part of a
movie, a scriptwriter and director would have actors and actresses
play the parts, and the violence would be obvious to all. Recall
the scene in The Ten Commandments where the Egyptian armies
attempted to follow Moses across the Red Sea. One sees horses and
soldiers trapped under tons of water. Their bodies go limp before
they can get to the surface. And those who can make it to the top
face certain death trying to swim back to shore. In spite of these,
and other horrific scenes, this movie is often held to be a
"Christian classic" and deemed to be a good family film by many.

A second and even more disturbing example of gratuitous violence in
the Bible is found in the twentieth chapter of Judges. Here a
Levite and his concubine enter the house of an old man from the
hill country of Ephraim to spend the night. While they are there,
some wicked men in the city want to have homosexual relations with
the Levite traveler and demand that the old man hand them over. The
evil men take the man's concubine, rape and kill her, leaving her
dead body in the doorway. The traveler is so distraught that he
cuts his concubine into twelve pieces and sends the body parts back
to his fellow Israelites. The Israelites then form a revenge party
and go into battle with the Benjamites who will not turn over the
evil men for punishment.

Again, if this story were to be translated into a visual medium the
scenes of rape and later dismemberment of a body, even if they were
filmed in standards from the forties or fifties, would be very
disturbing.

Conclusion: The purpose of the violence in these examples may be
that the details in each passage provide information which serves
as a reason for a latter action. Or, the information provided shows
us something about the nature of God and the way He deals with sin.
If both these examples show a difficult, but necessary use of
violence in telling a story, then perhaps violence may be used
(portrayed) for redemptive purposes in fictional mediums such as
film. This is not an airtight argument, rather the issue is raised
as a matter for consideration while keeping in mind that Christians
should always avoid living a vicariously sinful life through any
artistic medium.

Weaker Brother Considerations in Viewing Film

Paul's great teaching concerning meat sacrificed to idols and the
relationship of the stronger and weaker brothers to one another is
laid out in 1 Corinthians 8. We should remember that Paul clearly
puts the burden of responsibility on the stronger brother. It is
this person who should have the interest of the weaker brother in
mind.

Persons who exercise rampant Christian freedom when watching films
that are objectionable to some others does not necessarily mean
that they are strong Christians. It could indicate that these
people are too weak to control their passions and are hiding behind
the argument that they are a stronger brother. Do not urge others
to participate in something that you, as a Christian, feel
comfortable doing if they have reservations. You may inadvertently
cause the other person to sin.

There are basically three positions related to Christians viewing
film.

The first of these three is prohibition. This is the belief
that films, and often television and other forms of entertainment,
are inherently evil and detrimental to the Christian's spiritual
well being. Persons who maintain this position avoid all film,
regardless of the rating or reputed benefits, and urge others to do
the same.

Abstinence is the second position. This is the belief that
it is permissible for Christians to view films, but for personal
reasons this person does not choose to do so. This may be for
reasons ranging from a concern for the use of time or no real
desire to watch film, to avoidance because it may cause them or
someone they are concerned about to stumble. Willingly abstaining
from some or all films does not automatically make one a weaker
brother, and this charge should be avoided! One should avoid
labeling a fellow Christian "weaker" for choosing to abstain from
participation in some behavior due to matters of conscience.

Moderation is the final position. This is the belief that it
is permissible to watch films and that one may do so within a
certain framework of moderation. This person willingly views some
films but considers others to be inappropriate for Christians.
There is a great deal of disagreement here about what a Christian
can or cannot and should or should not watch. Although some of
these disagreements are matters of principle and not of taste,
Christian charity should be practiced whenever one is uncertain.

Conclusion: There is a valid history of concern about Christian
involvement in the arts and fictional and imaginative literature.
This issue extends to the medium of film and manifests similar
concerns about film and Christians who view film. However, because
film is one of the dominant mediums of cultural expression, film
criticism is necessary. If Christians do not make their voices
heard then others, often non-Christians, will dominate the
discussion. All films contain the philosophical persuasions of the
persons who contribute to their development, and it is the job of
the Christian who participates in these arts to make insightful,
fair, and well-informed evaluations of the work. Not everyone feels
comfortable in viewing some (or any) films and the Christian should
be especially mindful of the beliefs of others and always have the
interest of fellow believers as well as non-believers in mind.
While "film," the artistic expression of the cinematic medium has
been the focus and not "movies," the entertainment based
expression, much of what has been said of the former is applicable
to the later.

Appendix

Christians should be aware that the freedoms exercised in
participation in the film arts are privileges and should not be
practiced to the point of vicarious living through escape into
fictitious worlds. In 1 Corinthians 10: 23-31 (and 6:12) the
Apostle Paul writes that "everything is permissible, but not
everything is constructive."

He is addressing the issue of meat sacrificed to idols in chapter
10 and sexual purity in chapter 6. This may serve as a guide for
Christians who are concerned about their involvement in film and a
caution against construing what is written here as a license to
watch anything and everything. The Apostle is very careful to
distinguish between that which is permissible and that which is
constructive, or expedient. What Paul means is that, in Christ,
believers have freedoms which extend to all areas of life, but
these freedoms have the potential to be exercised carelessly or
without regard for others, and thus become sin. The guiding rule
here is that Christians should seek the good of others and not
their own desires. This would mean that anyone who is participating
in film that is objectionable should have the interests of others,
both believers and non-believers, in mind. We live in a fallen
world and almost everything we touch we affect with our fallen
nature, the arts notwithstanding. If we are to be active in
redeeming the culture for the glory of God, then by necessity we
must participate in the culture and be salt and light to a very
dark and unsavory world. It is imperative that Christians who are
active in their culture and interested in participating in the ever
growing "culture wars," remember Paul's admonition in Philippians
that we "work out our salvation daily with fear and trembling."
Anything less would be flirting with spiritual disaster and would
not bring glory to God.

Parents concerned for the spiritual and psychological welfare of
their children would do well to offer more that a list of
prohibitions against what films can be viewed. As with anything
that involves issues of Christian freedom, maturity in individual
matters must be taken into account. The example of a young child's
first BB gun may serve as an illustration. In some instances a
child may be ready for the first air rifle at age twelve or
thirteen. Other children may not be ready until they are eighteen,
and some may best served if they never possess the gun in question.
Parents should realize that film is a narrative medium which often
contains complex philosophical ideas. To continue to absorb films
at the current rate and not offer thoughtful criticism on what we
are watching is equivalent to visiting museums and announcing that
the Picasso or Rembrandt retrospective is "cool" or "stupid." If we
are concerned parents, and wish to gain the respect of our
children, we can and must do better than this.